Hacker News Reader

Comment by solipsism | Hacker News Reader

What are you talking about? Where in this article does the author treat Google like a religion? He specifically said it wouldn't be the end of the world if he didn't make it. He specifically said others shouldn't study that much.

Another comment based on the headline and not reading the article? Bet you'll get those anti-google upvotes anyway.

View on HN

What about: "The more I learn about Google, the more I want to work there. In brief, Google is a company that [...] gives employees the freedom to make good decisions for the user. [...] Nowadays candidates are chosen based on coding ability, technical knowledge, and Googleyness."

As a user, it hasn't been my experience in a long while that Google gives employees the freedom to make good decisions for the user. Google Plus wasn't about users. The shutdown of Google Reader, or of countless other products that had a strong following, weren't to please or help users.

And what's "Googleyness" if not a religious feature?

> gives employees the freedom to make good decisions for the user

Not nearly true in any 'Data Driven' company...this dude has no idea who is arbitrating decisions in any reasonable size company...

Personally the Googleyness thing is the most cult-like aspect of Google by far.

None of that approaches religiosity. Your ridiculous interpretation is colored by your preexisting opinions about Google.

Your logic also fails you. Developers having the freedom to do what's right for the user doesn't imply they succeed.

All I see here are a lot of personal attacks. Feel free to explain what your definition of "religiosity" is and why it doesn't apply to what Bambax quoted.

I asked which part is religious. Bambax quoted some non-religious things. Why would it be on me to prove everything he/she says is not something it obviously isn't?

Also, which attack is personal? I'm attacking an interpretation. Nothing personal about it.

When you ridicule any aspect of a person (such as their interpretation of "religiosity"), it's a personal attack. Look up the definition of "personal". Oh, and yes: calling someone's interpretation of "religiosity" "ridiculous" is literally ridiculing said personal interpretation.

Btw, I noticed that you still haven't provided your own definition of "religiosity". Are you worried that someone else might ridicule that as well?

Ok, so what is Googleyness?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com